Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Hong Kong Case Law

Housing allowance

  • 7 Jan 2021

    AH FAT JEAN MAX v. XIAN CORP LTD

    Citation
    [2021] HKCFI 22
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCLA11/2019

    The Court upheld the Presiding Officer's interpretation that the Annual Commission Clause entitled the appellant to 10% of net profit attributable to his own profit centres; the US$50,000 and US$40,000 payments were interim payments accepted by the appellant and, by the parties' conduct, precluded reliance on the No Oral Modification Clause (waiver/estoppel); the housing allowance was provided in kind and varied by conduct and lapsed on termination; the appellant failed to prove entitlement to the claimed annual leave; accordingly the appeal was dismissed and costs awarded to the respondent.

  • 12 Sept 2013

    TWAMA also known as WAMA v. T, DJ-PF

    Citation
    TWAMA also known as WAMA v. T, DJ-PF
    Court
    Family Court
    Case number
    FCMC13094/2012

    On a broad‑brush assessment of immediate needs versus the husband's ability to pay the court ordered HK$25,000 per month to the wife and HK$20,000 per month per child (total HK$65,000) from 1 December 2013, reasoning that the husband's net income and housing options permitted that level while accounting for school fees, potential bonuses, and the wife's limited income.

  • 31 May 2007

    HKSAR v. CNT SECURITY CO LTD

    Citation
    HKSAR v. CNT SECURITY CO LTD
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMA887/2006

    The court held that 'housing allowance or other housing benefit' in the definition of 'relevant income' is limited to actual and genuine housing expenses and does not include a non-accountable allowance which is merely a label to reduce MPF contributions; on the evidence CNT improperly deducted the full housing allowances claimed (none for Ho and more than $800 per month for Li) and failed to prove a reasonable excuse under s43B(1); therefore convictions were upheld and the appeal dismissed, with further written submissions invited on appropriate compensation for Mr Li.

  • 2 Apr 2004

    CHENG CHUNG SHAN v. LI SIU MAN

    Citation
    CHENG CHUNG SHAN v. LI SIU MAN
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCMP440/2004

    The Court of Appeal granted conditional leave to appeal because there were arguable grounds that the judge below failed to consider material matters — notably the financing and possible self-induced nature of the husband's property acquisition and the full impact of the variation on the wife's repayment of legal costs under the Legal Aid first charge — and ordered limited further affidavit evidence to be filed before appeal proceeds.

  • 5 Dec 1997

    ARCHER, HAROLD DEAN v. THE HONG KONG CHANNEL LTD.

    Citation
    ARCHER, HAROLD DEAN v. THE HONG KONG CHANNEL LTD.
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    CACV155/1997

    Contractual clause preventing carryover of annual leave was inconsistent with s.41AA(5)(a) and void under s.70; on the facts it was more probable the leave taken spanning Dec 1994–Jan 1995 was leave earned in 1994, and the appellant was entitled to payment for the 7 days' untaken 1995 leave (judgment HKD 9,230). All other challenges to the trial judge's factual findings and awards were insufficient to overturn the decision below.

  • 13 Jun 1997

    ARCHER, HAROLD DEAN v. THE HONG KONG CHANNEL LTD.

    Citation
    ARCHER, HAROLD DEAN v. THE HONG KONG CHANNEL LTD.
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCA560/1996

    On the balance of probabilities the plaintiff�s employment ran from 6 July 1990 (date of signed contract) to 17 June 1995 (board termination); plaintiff failed to prove continuous employment prior to July 1990 or board authority for bonuses or increased housing allowance; dismissal was for performance (not redundancy) so no severance or long service pay; defendant established unauthorised excess housing payments and unauthorised bonus entitling it to set‑off; net judgment for plaintiff $82,356 plus interest and provisional costs directions.

  • 9 Dec 1996

    NECKEL NILS v. DUAL VOLTAGE CO. LTD.

    Citation
    NECKEL NILS v. DUAL VOLTAGE CO. LTD.
    Court
    Court of First Instance
    Case number
    HCLA110/1996

    A non-accountable housing allowance paid under the contract is consideration for services and falls within the statutory definition of 'wages' under the Employment Ordinance; the statutory exclusion for 'the value of any accommodation provided by the employer' applies to benefits in kind, not to actual monetary housing allowances, so the housing allowance must be included in wages in lieu of notice.